Self Evident. Proof of Twin Tower CD = Remote Controlled, Swapped-in, Military Drone Aircraft on 9/1

reply to post by NewAgeMan


Oh, I actually get that part okay. I mean as far as how aircraft can shadow and trade places on a radar screen. Especially on interior US radar screens where operators aren't looking for the kinds of things commonly used by smugglers in the Caribbean and South American airspace.

It's what happened to them? I guess it is a real tough one to answer because it takes such effort to get to even addressing what seemed the first and most obvious point to me.

Did the real airliners crash, land somewhere and everyone get disappeared by MIB, or what? That's what I meant. Not how the planes seen taking off could, on radar, never appear to have changed.... That very specific technical detail wouldn't have been a boggle to pull off.

reply to post by NewAgeMan


As an Ironworker and a Glazier of high rise, I know beyond a doubt it was controlled demo.
I won't even argue about it. Massive thread.

SnF

(large size for reading the text) 911anomalies.files.wordpress.com...

9/11 Flight Paths

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


Wrabbit (I like saying your name), take a good look at the 2nd link I provided earlier which is the best hypothesis I've seen in terms of the coralling and elimination of the passengers, where I offered Operation Northwoods as an example describing a plane-swap scenario revealing that this very kind of thing has been contemplated and proposed before, in the case of Northwoods by the Join Chiefs, in response to which Kennedy was outraged, and it might even have been in that context that he talked, in a rage, about breaking the CIA up into a million pieces, and we're well aware on the 50th anniversary of his assassination just how well that went down..

1) Operation Northwood (pdf)
www2.gwu.edu...

2) Flight of the Bumble Planes
www.public-action.com...

Just as a point of interest, here's the "long approach" video of the plane on final approach to impact, while travelling at 575-600 mph at about a 1000 feet altitude, making rapid, final adjustments (note the wing movements) including a final black-out level high-g turn inward, with the nose at that point as expected for such a tight turn, diving down, to avoid almost missing or just clipping the corner of the building (this is not the best video by which to see that final adjustment, but it is to show speed and maneuvering).


Quote from earlier:

UA pilot by the name of Capt. Russ Wittenberg, said that he himself who flew the actual flight 175 aircraft, a Boeing 767-22 N612UA, could not have piloted it in the manner observed and that it exceeded that aircraft's performance envelope. Edit: According to him, at that speed and altitude the controls stiffen up and become almost unresponsive.

Capt. Russ Wittenberg, U.S. Air Force – Former Air Force fighter pilot, over 100 combat missions. Commercial pilot for Pan Am and United Airlines for 35 years. Had previously flown the actual two United airplanes that were hijacked on 9/11.

Article: "'The government story they handed us about 9/11 is total B.S." Wittenberg convincingly argued there was absolutely no possibility that Flight 77 could have "descended 7,000 feet in two minutes, all the while performing a steep 270 degree banked turn before crashing into the Pentagon's first floor wall."

"For a guy to just jump into the cockpit and fly like an ace is impossible," said Wittenberg, recalling that when he made the jump from Boeing 727s to the highly sophisticated computerized characteristics of the 737s through 767s, it took him considerable time to feel comfortable flying.

Audio Interview, Capt.Russ Wittenberg, 9/16/04
M3U (download)
RAM (download)

MP3 (plays)

911underground.com...

reply to post by NewAgeMan


What "black out level high G turn"? That wasn't even a 2 or 3 G turn. That wasn't even a turn, it was a bank.

reply to post by randyvs


" I know beyond a doubt it was controlled demo. "

Thats pretty much a " Given " by now . The Question that Still remains without much Proof , is Who was Responsable ? The List of Suspects is beyond reproach when it comes to Definitive Finger Pointing IMO..........;(

Zaphod58
reply to post by NewAgeMan

 

What "black out level high G turn"? That wasn't even a 2 or 3 G turn. That wasn't even a turn, it was a bank.

You may be right but at the last moment the nose was sure dipping down really fast.. which would indicate more than a mere bank but I'm no aviation expert, just a little time on computer flight sims a ways back and I remember that part, the implication of which the plane was pulling some gs.

The main point to consider is it's speed (586mph) and altitude, and rapid maneuvering as if the plane was being driven by an ace pilot, same thing and to a much greater degree with the Pentagon plane and flying ace Hani Hanjour.




And it looks like the right wing was bending something fierce, as well.

It is also certain from that second pic, that it was painted with the expected UA livery, but that doesn't prove that it was flight 175.

reply to post by NewAgeMan


No, it wasn't. I've been in some pretty hard turns in a small plane, and it takes a lot more than "the nose dipping" to do it. That was at best a 1.5G bank.

reply to post by NewAgeMan


What about it? You're supposed to at least put some commentary so people have some idea what your point is.

intrptr
reply to post by NewAgeMan

 

"Possible connection to controlled Demo" can only be possibly considered if even one piece of leftover demolition material is was found in the rubble.

No?

Fine.

(You'd think someone would have faked that by now.)

Done and done! here

While thermite may have been used in some cases to cut larger basement beams, thus accounting for being found in the dust, there is no way it could account for ALL the evidence seen during the collapse and aftermath. You have to account for everything including the sustained heat in the basement hot enough to melt iron, the eyewitness reports that they saw people 'vaporized', the hanging skin without exposure to fire of some victims, and the obvious massive amount of energy needed to fling heavy steel beams hundreds of feet laterally, the concrete floors into explosive dust, and the heat that was reported in the dust cloud (which Judy Wood contradicts for some reason, against ALL eyewitness testimony).

There is no need to invent new weapons for what was seen, nukes explains it all and has been proven by Jeff Prager, as well as other researchers once they got a look at the spectroscopy of the dust; it required a nuclear expert to know what they were seeing, not the original researchers who were looking for toxins in the dust, and didn't realize what the daughter products of fission would unequivocally be. We've long had military special tactics nukes the size of footballs with a limited range of energy and radiation signature hard to detect without specialized equipment.

It's all here, the usual debunkers won't bother reading this:
911scholars.ning.com...

It appears that the flights were swapped out (two groups of passengers being put on one plane), there is evidence that at least one plane didn't leave from the announced gate (see Pilots for 911 truth for much info on that), the black box info shows that the cockpit doors were NEVER OPENED, thus negating the possibility of hijackings and confirming that only remote control could have accomplished the takeover of the planes, and it's also possible that the passengers thought they were participating in a military exercise (including when they made phone calls from the ground, not air?) and were dispatched afterwards . It's highly unlikely that the PA plane was flight 93, and that the Pentagon had a commercial jet hit it.

As usual, OP, there are the same sorry few who will attack any theorizing on this issue by real people asking real questions.

It's almost enough to make you think that they don't want you asking questions, like it's not 'patriotic' or something. Queer, that.

Also, there has been research done into exactly which locations on the towers were hit, and what organizations were targeted. That gets pretty interesting too. I wish I had bookmarked some of my research on this, but it's available to anyone willing to spend the time looking.

As far as WHO did it, it sure as hell wasn't some guy in a cave and a bunch of patsy boogiemen from some foreign countries the Cheney/Bush administration wanted to invade. For starters, think of who was in the PEOC running things while that doofus Bush was reading about goats, and who might have sent him there so he could be out of the way? All you have to do is look at a photo of Cheney looking at Bush from behind to know what he thought of the guy...the disdain and disgust is epic.

What? You didn't think BUSH was really President, did you?

signalfire
the black box info shows that the cockpit doors were NEVER OPENED, thus negating the possibility of hijackings and confirming that only remote control could have accomplished the takeover of the planes, and it's also possible that the passengers thought they were participating in a military exercise (including when they made phone calls from the ground, not air?) and were dispatched afterwards . It's highly unlikely that the PA plane was flight 93, and that the Pentagon had a commercial jet hit it.

There's also zero evidence that the sensor was even connected. Because it never showed the door open, even when it was on the ground at the gate.

Zaphod58
reply to post by NewAgeMan

 

What about it? You're supposed to at least put some commentary so people have some idea what your point is.

If anything it was to keep the "no-planers" away and at bay, plus it also demonstrates the degree of coverage of the 2nd plane impact, which would have been anticipated for the desired "shock and awe" (Rumsfeld) effect and to help "sell" the idea that the plane impacts and resulting fire were sole cause of the destruction of the building(s) which took place in the case of the south tower, about an hour later (56 minutes).

reply to post by NewAgeMan


Or, it was well covered because the first tower was already burning and the news was watching.

reply to post by signalfire


Aside from the need for small nukes to bring down the buildings as observed, we're in complete agreement.

Steel beams were thrown a couple of football fields away across the street to crash through the Winter Garden Atrium, and human bones fragments were found on top of, adjacent buildings, although some would say those came from the plane debris as it exited the building, and not as a result of the buildings' rather explosive destruction.

Zaphod58
reply to post by NewAgeMan

 

Or, it was well covered because the first tower was already burning and the news was watching.

Of course that's true, and something that the perps would have factored into the equation, that's my point. And we can all remember the fireball, and the destruction of the buildings playing over and over and over again from every angle and perspective.

It was a global psy-op, which the buildings coming down, both of them, completed, while making someone who recently purchased the building complex and who got special terrorism insurance one heck of a lot of money, among other cronies in the military industrial complex, not unlike Vietnam after Lydon Johnson took over from JFK.

Zaphod58
reply to post by NewAgeMan

 

And other pilots have said that they could have. There is a lot more proof that it was 175 than it was anything else.

So give specifics, state who said what and give us the freedom to fact check. Like they say, "pics or it didn't happen"